President Trump recently made a trip for the first time to the United Kingdom. While there he met with the Queen of England and the British Prime Minister Theresa May. During the visit, there were innumerable protestors as well as complainers over the president sitting in the seat of Winston Churchill. One way they chose to protest was by putting in place a large bobblehead of President Trump as an orange ball that floated overhead in London, England. However, another protestor got in real big trouble for what they did.
Fox News reported,
“A 55-year-old man was arrested Sunday in connection to a protest that saw him paraglide within meters of President Donald Trump as he visited his golf course in Scotland on Friday, officials said. The man, not yet identified, was spotted breaching a no-fly zone carrying a banner reading, “Trump: Well Below Par,” as he flew just meters past the U.S. leader at his Turnberry resort in Ayrshire. “Police Scotland can confirm that a 55-year-old man has been arrested in connection with an incident when a powered parachute was flown in the vicinity of the Turnberry Hotel around 9.45 pm on Friday, 13 July 2018,” a spokesman told the Independent in a statement. No further details were released.
The stunt, orchestrated by environmental group Greenpeace, was slammed by police who claimed the man had placed himself in “grave danger” as snipers watched from the hotel’s roof.
Police said the protester breached a no-fly zone over the hotel and committed a criminal offense, but the environmental group said it had informed police about the stunt before it took place. Footage of the incident shows Trump cutting across the grass, quickly heading to the entrance of the resort soon after the glider appeared. Trump and his wife, Melania, are spending the weekend out of the spotlight at his Scottish golf resort at Turnberry, on the western coast, ahead of his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki on Monday.”
— Greenpeace UK (@GreenpeaceUK) July 13, 2018
The Huffington Post reported,
“As more than 250,000 people took to the streets of London and other U.K. cities on Friday in protest of President Donald Trump and his policies, the U.S. leader told a baffled Piers Morgan that “many, many” of the demonstrations were actually pro-Trump. “Some of them are protesting in my favor, you know that?” Trump told the British journalist aboard Air Force One on Friday evening. “There are many, many protests in my favor.” Morgan, whose interview with the president was published Sunday in The Daily Mail, expressed his skepticism in the article. “Hmmm. I must have missed those,” Morgan wrote.
A handful of pro-Trump demonstrations were organized in a number of U.K. cities on the day after the president’s interview with Morgan ― though they were dwarfed in size by the anti-Trump rallies. The largest of the gatherings backing the president was a joint “Welcome Trump” and “Free Tommy Robinson” event in London on Saturday. Robinson is a far-right, anti-Muslim activist serving a 13-month prison sentence for contempt of court. A Trump ambassador reportedly lobbied the UK recently on his behalf. According to The Sunday Express, about 500 people took part in Saturday’s demonstration.
Based on images shared on social media, other pro-Trump gatherings in cities including Manchester and Sheffield attracted far fewer attendees. In his interview with Morgan, the president also spoke about his “easy talk” with Queen Elizabeth II, whom he’d met at Windsor Castle earlier on Friday. And as has been his pattern, he defended North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying that while the two men are probably “ruthless,” he knows “plenty” of other people who are ruthless too. Trump discussed giving British Prime Minister Theresa May advice about how to gain an advantage over the European Union in the Brexit negotiations. May revealed on Sunday that Trump’s suggestion had been for Britain to “sue the EU” and “not go into negotiations.””
It should not be shocking that an environmental group supported this protestor against President Trump. These environmental groups are straight out of the ideology and pathology of the far left of the Democratic Party. They should be ashamed of themselves for incentivizing such behavior. Their needs to be a little bit of reverence and respect for the highest office in the land and their actions time and time again show they do not have any respect or reverence for that matter. We need to be better, support better, and encourage better and by extension export more. Because real Americans don’t do such disgraceful things such as that.
Share if you agree that these protestors are ridiculous.
Share if you believe that they should leave President Trump alone.
Share if you think that the Secret Service and the police did the right thing with the protestor.
Share if you agree this individual should be punished.
Dem Lawmaker Wants To Make Criminals Out Of People By Making A New ‘Hate Crime’
There seems to be some Constitutional issues with this
As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service in the world, RWN offers the following information published by DownTrend
Well, I guess this is one way to cut down on the number of black people in jail. A New York State lawmaker is proposing making it a hate crime to call the police on black people. If you think I’m making this up or overreacting to something, check out this headline from The Patch, which says the same:
And the article backs that headline up:
New Yorkers who call 911 on law-abiding people of color are committing hate crimes and should be prosecuted, according to a state senator who was recently reported to police for campaigning in his own district.
State Senator Jesse Hamilton, who represents Brownsville, Crown Heights and Flatbush, proposed new legislation a week after a self-described Trump fan called police to report him for speaking to constituents in public. It would criminalize 911 calls against people of color without evidence of malice.
“That’s gonna be a hate crime. This pattern of calling the police on black people going about their business and participating in the life of our country has to stop,” said Hamilton.
Try to guess the race and political party of this guy. If you said white and Republican you were way off.
The deal is, there have been a handful of incidents in which white or non-black people have called the police on black people for doing things that were determined not to be a crime. The natural knee-jerk reaction is to make a law for something that isn’t even remotely a problem.
The law however would be a huge problem. If people know they could get slapped with a hate crime charge, they would be reluctant to ever call the police on a black person no matter what kind of heinous crime they appear to be committing. The onus should not be on average citizens to determine the guilt of a person they think is committing a crime. The easiest solution is for 911 operators to weed out the silly calls and not send police when someone reports something that very clearly is not a crime.
I have more than a few questions about this proposed law: Would it still be okay to call the police on white people. I’m assuming yes. Could black people call the police on other black people? How do Asians and Hispanics figure into this law? Oh, and what about illegal aliens who have sanctuary in NY and are above the law? Can they call the police on black people?
There also seems to be some Constitutional issues with this proposed law because it specifically makes it a hate crime to call the police on black people. It would still be a dumb law if it included all people of all races, but making it race-specific like this is a clear violation of equal protection under the law.
The clarification the news gave on this proposed law doesn’t make it seem any less terrible:
Hamilton’s proposal would strengthen current legislation that outlaws false reports by designating racially-motivated 911 calls as hate crimes, especially in instances where the call results in police responding with the preconception that the person might cause a threat. Read More
Man Found Contracts Showing Obama Was Paying Trump Spy – Obama Tried To Shut Him Up By Stripping Security Clearance
Obama-appointed officials cleaned house
A man named Adam Lovinger lost his security clearances after complaining about the questionable government contract that was awarded to Stefan Halper, who is being touted as an FBI informant whose job was to keep an eye on President Trump’s campaign. Who stripped the clearances, you might ask? It’s being reported that it was Obama-appointed officials who cleaned house and ripped Lovinger’s clearances away, presenting to us quite a concern that involves contracts and clashing forces within the government who either supported Obama then or support Trump now. Either way, it’s a mess.
Lovinger was reportedly complaining about Halper’s contracts back in 2016. He then lost his clearances on May 1, 2017. Lovinger’s lawyer, Sean M. Bigley, then complained to the Pentagon’s senior ethics official, mad that Lovinger’s “higher ups” were basically punishing him with the whole security clearance thing – punishing him for complaining about the deals that were given to Mr. Halper and apparently a “best friend” of Chelsea Clinton, as per the Washington Times.
The Washington Times called this out, as well as numerous other sites who wanted the public to be notified about what was going on behind closed doors. Since John Brennan just lost his security clearances, it was probably just another relative topic to bring up someone else who lost their clearances as well. However the big problem is why they lost their clearances and how it ties back to Obama’s administration, and perhaps even Hillary Clinton on a long stretch. Rather than point fingers at two particular names, it might just be the entire Democratic Party. However it goes, it’s up to the public to absorb the information and make their own decisions.
Anytime these news stories are breaking the headlines, it’s always important to take in all the information and figure out what’s going on. Then share the story with people who would enjoy it. If you’re up for a good bit of government drama, then this is right up your political alley!
Here’s a brief summary that details most of what happened:
“As it turns out, one of the two contractors Mr. Lovinger explicitly warned his ONA superiors about misusing in 2016 was none other than Mr. Halper,” Mr. Bigley wrote in his ethics complaint, which called the contracts “cronyism and corruption.”
Mr. Lovinger filed a whistleblower reprisal complaint in May with the Defense Department inspector general against James Baker, director of the Office of Net Assessment. The complaint also singles out Washington Headquarters Services, a Pentagon support agency that awarded the Halper contracts totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars.
In an internal October 2016 email to higher-ups, Mr. Lovinger wrote of “the moral hazard associated with the Washington Headquarters Services contracting with Stefan Halper,” the complaint said. It said Mr. Baker hired Mr. Halper to “conduct foreign relations,” a job that should be confined to government officials.
“It was a topic of conversation within the office,” Mr. Bigley told The Times. “What is Halper doing, and why is he being paid astronomically more than others similarly situated?”
The Office of Net Assessment conducts analyses of future threats and ways to defeat them.
“Nobody in the office seemed to know what Halper was doing for his money,” Mr. Bigley said. “Adam said Jim Baker, the director, kept Halper’s contracts very close to the vest. And nobody seemed to have any idea what he was doing at the time. He subcontracted out a good chunk of it to other academics. He would compile them all and then collect the balance as his fee as a middleman. That was very unusual.”
Mr. Bigley told The Times that the inspector general’s criminal investigative division has interviewed Mr. Lovinger about Office of Net Assessment contracting.
In all, Mr. Lovinger has four cases pending: whistleblower reprisal, criminal division, an ethics complaint and an appeal on his security clearance revocation.
A spokesman told The Times that the Pentagon would not comment on the case’s merits.
The spokesman said the Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudicaitons Facility reviewed Mr. Lovinger’s clearance.
It then “issued a statement of reasons stating why, under [federal guidelines] it would not be clearly consistent with the national interest to continue Mr. Lovinger’s security clearance, and he was provided with the opportunity to respond to the security concerns,” the spokesman said. “After considering all available information, the CAF issued an unfavorable clearance determination and Mr. Lovinger’s clearance was revoked.”
Mr. Bigley said the conflict is that the consolidated authority resides within the Washington Headquarters Services, which is the target of Mr. Lovinger’s complaint.
“The CAF’s entire ‘adjudication’ of this case was orchestrated by corrupt officials at WHS, which was demonstrated numerous times throughout the process,” he said.
To conservatives, Mr. Lovinger is a victim of the “deep state” — Obama loyalists out to harm the Trump administration.
Press reports identified Mr. Halper as a paid FBI confidential human source, whose mission was to make contacts with Trump campaign workers. The FBI was investigating any Trump ties to Moscow at a time when its intelligence officers were hacking Democratic Party computers.”
After lodging his complaints about the Office of Net Assessment’s outside research in general and Mr. Halper specifically, Mr. Lovinger sought an assignment to the Trump White House national security staff in January 2017. He was soon confronted with allegations from Mr. Baker that he failed to follow security rules. Mr. Lovinger denies any wrongdoing.
Mr. Baker was appointed chief of the Office of Net Assessment in 2015 by Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, Mr. Obama’s appointee.
The Washington Headquarters Services, which revoked Mr. Lovinger’s clearance, is headed by Barbara Westgate, who was appointed in 2016.
Perhaps the most intriguing narrative in the Lovinger story is the appearance of Mr. Halper, a national security consultant in the U.S. and Britain who is tied to that country’s MI6 spy agency through his business partner.”
EPIC VIDEO: Former Obama Supporter Gives POWERFUL Answer For Why She Chose To #WalkAway
It gives many Democrats, who felt trapped by an abusive political party that shamed them for “wrong thing,” the courage...
Dem Lawmaker Wants To Make Criminals Out Of People By Making A New ‘Hate Crime’
There seems to be some Constitutional issues with this
Somali American Wins Democrat Primary After Saying Muslims Are Victims Of 911
She is the second Somali-American to likely be a state representative
WATCH: The Deplorable Choir Has A New Song Called “Vote Republican” They Will Make Your Day!
Just a few reasons why you should vote Republican
Infuriating Report Comes Out About ‘More Than Half’ Of All Foreign Refugees In America
Exactly what the Democrats ordered